|
counteract
the oddly Gore-devoted women’s vote which calls into question the
entire notion of allowing women to vote?
Five weeks and two more debates will tell.
It
was only at the end in his closing statement, for example, that
George W. mentioned the need for - and his support of - Ballistic
Missile Defense. This
is a major difference between the two candidates on defense policy.
Ballistic Missile Defense is a common sense idea.
The United States, as the most prosperous and politically
mature country on earth, should at the earliest opportunity deploy
such defenses. The
cost, which of course would run into the multi-billions, is a
meaningless consideration when you consider how much it would cost
if say, San Francisco, was zapped with a nuker.
Never mind the human cost, think of the value of the real
estate alone! Even
a rudimentary defense that will reduce even slightly the possibility
of some malevolent nation or tyrant sending a nuker this way should
be a top priority. Heck, Israel, which country has access to some of
America’s most promising technologies, is set to deploy a
surprisingly effective missile-defense.
Why not the United States?
Gore is particularly asleep on this issue and granted the
American people need to better appreciate the issue, and George W.
should’ve discussed this more.
Hope he harps on this more in his next debate.
During
a decent spiel on defense policy, Bush should’ve emphasized this
dramatic difference in protecting vs. not protecting American cities
from an increasingly possible nuke attack.
Especially as it plays into his theme of Clinton/Glore having
eight years and not doing anything.
Clinton/Gore had eight years to advance the cause of
Ballistic Missile Defense, and if anything, they’ve gone backwards. Bush might’ve also mentioned that this administration –
and particularly incompetent Energy Secretary Bill Richardson –
this administration has however been quite good at letting
America’s most expensive and deadly secrets about advanced nuclear
warhead design waltz out the door.
A case could be made that Bill Richardson and not Janet Reno
is the most cravenly incompetent and harmful cabinet member in this
administration.
|
Gore
did a good job of hammering home the populist notion that
Bush’s tax cuts go to the “top 1% of wage earners.”
Bush tried to parry by pointing out that everyone who
pays taxes after all, should get a tax break, but he
might’ve explicitly stated that those who pay the most taxes
will of course get the highest tax break. |
 |
Besides,
everyone knows that the top 1% of earners have the ways and means to
shelter taxes anyway, they ALWAYS get the breaks because they have
the incentive to go after them.
Give “the rich” a “tax break” – take away their
incentive to shelter income and such, and they may end up paying
more taxes! Bush
briefly made the valid point that eight years ago, Bill Clinton
promised a “middle class tax cut” just as Al Gore is doing now
– and of course it never happened.
Bush
occasionally looked defensive, he needed to hit his stride somewhat
better, and correspondingly put more heat on Gore, as there is so
much heat he could bring down on the pandering Veep.
Gore looked polished and forthright; after all, he’s an
accomplished political bullshit artists, there’s no denying that.
He comes across sometimes as arrogant, and Bush missed
another chance to point out that during his spiels, Gore at
different times made Education, Campaign Finance reform, saving
Social security, and National Defense “the number one priority of
his Administration.”” How
the heck is he going to make them all “Number One?”
Bush could’ve belted him with this one, pointing this out
as yet another example of “say anything Al.”
And
it wasn’t until the end of the debate, when moderator Jim Lehrer
asked Bush a “character” question, that Bush really swung
through a pitch. He
made note of Gore’s total lack of credibility on campaign finance,
about Gore’s ridiculous “no controlling legal authority”
statement in defense of his atrocious fundraising schemes. Bush
mentioned the infamous Buddhist Temple, but he didn’t explicitly
explain the relevance of these remarks to the many people watching
who don’t know the details. Bush
ever so lightly mentioned how remiss attorney general Janet Reno was
in failing to investigate the blatant fund raising abuses of
Clinton/Gore, but he should’ve mentioned how FBI director Louis
Freeh directly challenged Janet Reno to appoint a special counsel to
investigate Clinton/Gore 1996 fundraising.
Reno of course ignored this challenge from the Justice
Department’s chief front-line law enforcement officer.
George managed to get a little dig in on Gore, but he
could’ve hammered this point home, and he could’ve done so in a
straightforward “just the facts” manner that wouldn’t look
“mean-spirited” to the perceived pansy-waisted
can’t-stand-the-negative electorate.
If anything, this electorate needs some blood in the water.
In
the end, a draw, with Gore maybe getting an edge for hammering his
points home somewhat more effectively.
Bush did get the best line off of the debate but it wasn’t
delivered as effectively as it might’ve been, “The Buck used to
stop in the Oval Office, now the buck stops in the Lincoln
Bedroom.” Colorful,
but combined with a more straightforward explanation of
Clinton/Gore’s selling of White House access, it would’ve been a
debate-winner. The line people would’ve picked up on and repeated.
Bush
did lightly and sarcastically mention how Gore “stands up to Trial
Lawyers and Hollywood.” (of course both of these groups have Gore
in their hip pocket). Bush
needs to flesh these kinds of points out next time around.
Again, the details of this off-hand remark, which are quite
valid, get lost on the vast majority of people who are just starting
to tune in to who the next prez will be. While most people know what Hollywood is, very very few know
what a trial lawyer is and the insidious effect these legal piranha
have on the justice system.
It
is Gore’s election to lose now, and he didn’t give any
overwhelming reasons why he should win it.
Bush is still in the game, this debate won’t give Gore a
perceptible boost and may slightly advance Bush in the eyes of the
American people. Gore
has in effect shot his wad, he did as good as he could. Bush can take heart that he has room for improvement and can
do even better in the follow-on debates.
Which unfortunately for him will be in front of a smaller
audience and moderated by left-wind affirmative-action cable anchor,
Bernard Shaw.
One
note about ABC’s coverage: During split-screen shots of both
candidates during a spiel by either candidate, ABC’s camera on
Bush was jiggly. Particularly
when Bush was speaking this was somewhat disconcerting, even
unflattering to Bush and made it hard to follow his point.
Gore’s camera in the split-screen shot was rock steady.
You wouldn’t think, would you, that the liberal network of
Sam Donaldson, Cokie Roberts and the annoyingly “boyish” George
Stephanopoulos did this on purpose?
It happened EVERY time in the split-screen, you mean to
believe that the director doesn’t notice this and tell his
cameraman to steady the fucking shot? |
